Navigate:

Opinion Contributor

Fortifying our energy security

The Arctic National Wildlife Range has been off limits to energy production. |
AP Photo
Close

Inexpensive energy helped build our economy into the most powerful and prosperous in the world. High energy costs, along with growing dependence on foreign sources, take us in the opposite direction.

And, it is not just oil. We have not licensed and built a nuclear power plant in decades. Ignoring advances made in nuclear safety and the deployment of nuclear plants in the rest of the world, U.S. policymakers have thwarted development of nuclear energy despite its obvious benefits.

Text Size

Nuclear plants are a terrific source of job creation and economic development. Expanding nuclear power could create thousands of good-paying permanent jobs and provide yet another domestic source of vitally needed energy.

Oil and nuclear are not the only energy sources we need more of. The current situation demands an “all of the above” strategy -- diversifying our energy portfolio, and pushing development of our own natural resources. That means not just more oil and nuclear, but more coal, natural gas and renewables. Sooner rather than later.

Unfortunately, in the past two years Congress, along with Obama administration regulators, have promoted policies likely to push prices even higher, by creating disincentives for energy production in the United States. The glaring consequence of reducing new domestic energy production is greater dependence on foreign energy, coupled with higher commodity prices.

Enough is enough. The days of such policies must come to an end.

Congress has a duty to pursue a broad, visionary, comprehensive approach to energy security. Everything must be on the table. Neither our economy nor our national security can be adequately protected if we continue to declare various forms of energy, or areas of energy production, “off limits.” Instead, we need to pave the way for more nuclear power and for the extraction of more domestic natural resources.

If we do this, we can have adequate supplies of affordable energy and end the increasing demand for energy imports. If we do not, we will find our energy more expensive and less available. Our economy is likely to suffer and our growing dependence on foreign energy will jeopardize U.S. security.

The choice is clear. We owe it to all Americans to make the tough decisions and take the bold actions they expect and deserve. It is time to get back on track to protect our nation and expand our economy.

Fred Upton (R-Mich.) is the ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment. Former Energy Sec. Spencer Abraham served during the George W. Bush administration.

Readers' Comments (26)

I agree with you that energy security is paramount to not only the US economy but also our foreign policy. However, there is extreme short-sightedness in this article.

You mention that we need to increase the speed at which we diversify our energy, including renewable sources. However, you fail to actually say when you want that to happen, and you fail to address some very important points.

For example, you mention that opening up these reserves could run 60 million cars on oil and you also mentioned powering the US on oil for another two centuries. But you fail to ask yourself a basic question: Do we want to power ourselves on oil for another two centuries? Regardless of how you feel about that question, it is important to note that expanding domestic production of oil will only delay our adoption of renewable energy.

Its not the same context, but look at it from the perspective of what the computer did for printing: When personal computers exploded in the 90s, many thought that the amount of paper used world wide would decrease significantly as people started using email and the internet. However, instead of using less paper, we have more than tripled our use because of how easy it is to simply print something today, because of how cheap it is to print.

What I'm trying to say is: Yes, I agree, energy prices directly effect the economy. However, if (if) the end goal is to move to renewable sources, you have to slowly make current non-renewable sources more expensive, and/or subsidize renewable sources so that they are cheaper than non-renewable sources. Now of course, this initially goes against your main point that I have already agreed with: that lower energy prices boost the economy. However, look at it from a different perspective:

How can we boost the economy in another way, so that it can take the short term loss of higher non-renewable energy costs? If we can answer this question, then we can not only boost the economy, but also solve an important security issue (and, for some, a social policy issue) at once: Kill two or three birds with one stone.

Naturally this will not be easy, especially with the great experience Republicans and Democrats having working together these days. But, I have hope. Environmentalists will hate me, but I agree with you that nuclear is an extremely good option for making the transition from non-renewable to renewable energy. While many environmentalists have a decent point about nuclear waste, nuclear power is, currently, the only viable existing "renewable" option for realistically powering America.

I support an "all of the above" strategy to secure our energy needs and improve our economy. An important step left out of this article is supporting energy efficiency. We can stimulate the economy and reduce our evergy needs by passing the proposed HomeStar bill. This is a quick, easy, and cost effective step. I hope Congress will act to pass this bill.

Oil imports are growing. We can not afford the cost of importing ever more oil. Force restrictions on imports and expand development of Americas vast energy resources. We need the jobs and we need to quit redistributing Americas wealth to foreign nations. We have huge reserves of natural gas, coal and oil. New Nuclear technology is ready for prime time.

Wind, Solar etc have not reached the point where they are economically viable for the vast majority of Americans. Tariffs on imported oil could be used to support renewable energy research and development. Congress should pass legislation that encourages the development of all forms of American energy and mandates the reduction of foreign oil importation. We can no longer afford to borrow from the Chinese in order to purchase expensive foreign oil. Let Americans produce American energy for Americans.

I wouldn't hold my breath. If the government doesn't get you, the environmentalist will. Attempts, at creating more, or new energy, in this Country, are long gone. In this climate, I doubt you could invent the bicycle, if it hadn't been invented already. Hopefully, the new House of Reps, will hold hearings on all this environmental nonsense, and they can expose them, for what they are.

Our current policies choke off domestic energy supplies and force dependence on foreign energy. Suggestions that wind, solar or biofuels can replace fossil fuels are supported only by those hoping to profit from the fruitless pursuance of the policy of energy restriction.

The Untited States has 25% of the world's oil. 5 times the oil of Saudi Arabia in known shale oil deposits. We have hundred of billions of barrels of conventional oil and untold depsoits in most of the potential areas of supply offshore and on land. We have trillions of cubic feet of natutal gas in conventional deposits and many trillions more in shale rock deposits previously not recoverbale but now extractable with new horizontal drilling and "fracking" which cracks shale rock and linberates otherwise locked in natural gas. "Fracking' has revolutionized natutral gas production worldwide and today the US is exporting natural gas for the first time in many decades. We have enough natural gas to power cars and trucks and produce power. This power is far cleaner than coal and far cleaner than wind or solar when you consider that these power sources rely on fossil fuels 75% and 60% of the time rspectively for wind and solar.

Replacing natural gas for gasoline would cut carbon dioxide emissions in half, it would have virtually no pollution. It would be more economical than gasoline and would be a 100% domestic source of power. It is also cheaper than gasoline; it has no downside. As noted in the story nuclear could stimulate the economy with its construction and also by providing the lowest cost power possible rather than expecting the world's worst and most expensive power sources wind and solar to somehow decades from now become practical.

We have a $700 billion dollar trade deficit, each year, due to oil imports. This is double our trade deficit with China. This is unsustainable. This is the equivalent of one Stimulus package in deficit each year and will become worse as we continue to restrict our energy development.

We have no shortage of energy. We can have far cleaner air. We can reduce our dependence of foreign enrgy to zero. We cannot do this with the pretend solutions of wind, solar and biofuels. We need real solutions and real energy. Our current administration is providing neither. In reality they are blocking energy, forcing foreign dependence and stand in the way of cleaning the air and building the economy. They are worse than useless; they are the problem.

I support an "all of the above" strategy to secure our energy needs and improve our economy.

Mixing technologies that are the world's most expensive, and the most unreliable, and cannot clean the air is a position that defies logic. We need to utilize clean, domestic and affordable technologies that can make us 100% energy independent. Wind, solar and biofuels don't make the list.

Mixing technologies that are the world's most expensive, and the most unreliable, and cannot clean the air is a position that defies logic. We need to utilize clean, domestic and affordable technologies that can make us 100% energy independent. Wind, solar and biofuels don't make the list.

They are pork and pork is a horrible fuel.

Yes, we've discussed this before and I remain unimpressed with your fear of renewable energy.

Set aside the fact that you seem so focused on one small part of the solution, we've also discussed how nuclear and fossil fuels have their own costs and problems that you gloss over- waste disposal, not-in-my-backyard, massive upfront investments. There are no free lunches and there are no simple answers, which is why all-of-the-above is the fastest, most reasonable response.

Another reason- if we never invest in renewables, we will never be able to reap the rewards. There are a huge list of technologies that wouldn't have made your "acceptable list" that have spawned entire industries and reshaped the world. How many generations of computers, for instance, did we go through before they "made sense?" China ALREADY spends more than the U.S. on renewable energy with a much smaller economy. They know where the future lies.

I know, let's ban drilling for oil in the gulf, even though a peer reviewed study has said that is the WRONG thing to do. I swear, you libs are actually trying to ruin this country. I seriously hope that the conservatives can styme you libs for at least 2 more years so the folks that really care about the United States can regain control. Notice I didn't for a second mention repubs. I could care less if you have a D or R by your name as long as you are conservative and not socialist. It will almost take a "Manhatten" style project now because we really don't have any money because of the libs and their spending. If I were you though, I'd stock up on food and supplies.

China ALREADY spends more than the U.S. on renewable energy with a much smaller economy. They know where the future lies.

You are soooooo silly. China builds and puts online a new coal-fired powerplant every other day. You are correct though, they know where the future lies. By the way, we have some of the best air quality on this earth. China, Japan, India, Southeast Asia, are all on the bottom of the list. Same for water quality. You folks that put down the US and want to kill jobs so you can feel good are just wrong. Global warming is NOT happening. The earth has not warmed since 1998. We have the safest record for drilling, mining, nuclear, you name it. How many people have died because of nuclear accidents in the US? What, none????? How can that be.

Another reason- if we never invest in renewables, we will never be able to reap the rewards

The Imported Oil and Gas Industry has gotten TAX CREDITS of all kinds for many years , why not extend the same Tax Credits to Solar, Wind , Wave , Bio-fuels , fuel-cells and Geothermal Energy ?

We spend 380 billion dollars a year in Imported oil and gas, and some of the money goes to al-Qaeda through very wealthy extreme sunni-wahabi investors in Saudi Arabia , as we have learn in the USA Media and due to WikiLeaks , is that smart ?

Many Hedge-Funds and Private Equity Partnerships, the bankers to the Oil-Gas producers, went on a cheap-drug induced-nightmare-trip and wasted trillions of dollars in Credit -Default -Swaps , M-B-S , shorts and insurances,etc., as well as huge salaries and stock options for their executives and partners that later forced the USA Taxpayers to bail them all out , is that smart?

and we still have 9.8 % un-employment , even after huge tax cuts for the very rich since 2001, is that smart ?

The jobs are in new solar and wind-wave energies, in new fuel-cells , new materials and new ideas, but Washington D.C. is only talking about digging the floor deeper, and splitting more uranium without even knowing what to do with the toxic radioactive left-overs , is that smart?

and now they even talk about "gas-fracking" the rock underground, and when they ask Halliburton what kind of chemicals they use to break the gas molecules in this fracking method, they refuse to say, is that smart?

And why focus on Social Security privatization , like Rep. Ryan, when S.S. has nothing to do with the deficit ?

Congressman,millions of new jobs are waiting in Solar and Wind-Wave energy , like many are saying by installing solar and wind farms in every State and every town , why not train the workers on this new technology , made in the USA, and get going ?

Some of the neocons in the Administration , as well as in the GOP and independents like Lieberman, all they want is to keep the USA ( and with the EU, the christian block ) at War stuck in the Middle East , Christians against Muslims and for the Oil and Gas , while the Riyadh-TelAviv Lobby relaxes and spends our money, is that smart ? .... until when ?

Congressman, we see China and Canada, among many other nations, pouring resources in new energy technologies , in the future , in R&D for thin-film, for digital displays, for new mobile hologram technologies , new wave-current turbines and systems, and here ? here we push deeper into the hole and full of radioactive waste, is that smart ? we can't even push for new compact fusion reactors, just for more of the same old junk, is that smart?

And Congressman, as you well know, we are what we eat, and we eat more junk foods than anybody else on the planet, is that smart? We need the Congress to start a fresh healthy natural foods revolution, so that workers can find smarter energy solutions today !

The money is in the free sun and free and clean wind and waves , dear Congressman, that's why God gave them to us.

Renewable energy sources * have one fatal flaw. None of them with the exception of hydroelectric and geothermal are 24/7 energy sources and require back-up systems of equal output using either carbon based sources or nuclear energy sources. This requires permits from the US government that will take years to issue and litigate in the courts.

* Solar, Wind, Tidal, Hydroelectric & Geothermal

That being the case why build the renewable energy plants except where the economics or security issues are viable

At any time, one atomic bomb exploding in the Middle East could shut down most oil production in this area for years, and it will take 5 to 10 years to develop known sources of energy, in the USA, after the permits are issued. During this time the world economy will crash.

You are soooooo silly. China builds and puts online a new coal-fired powerplant every other day. You are correct though, they know where the future lies. By the way, we have some of the best air quality on this earth. China, Japan, India, Southeast Asia, are all on the bottom of the list. Same for water quality. You folks that put down the US and want to kill jobs so you can feel good are just wrong. Global warming is NOT happening. The earth has not warmed since 1998. We have the safest record for drilling, mining, nuclear, you name it. How many people have died because of nuclear accidents in the US? What, none????? How can that be.

See my first post- I'm for All Of the Above. That was my starting position and it still is. You know what All Of the Above includes? Coal. Oil. Nuclear. Oh, and renewables- because I happen to think it's stupid to not invest in the future. You know, stuff that doesn't run out and leave us high-and-dry, nor present the possibility of whiping out our environment.

(Is that water quality you're referring to including the Gulf? And do those super-safe minds include the Massey one that just killed a bunch of miners?)

Global warming? Never came up. It's a total Red Herring. Regardless of whether you think it's real or not, energy independence IS an issue. It just happens that some of the solutions may also help our environment- nothing wrong with that, is there?

The industry cannot stand without government help. Meaning you and I pay for it. Check with Spain and Portugal. They are now abandoning the renewable projects because they cost more than they will ever be worth, especially in jobs. Doesn't that mean anything to you? The sun and wind are only part time. Coal, oil, nuclear are proven to work without subsistance.

Yeah, it says they can't afford to invest in their future or compete globally. You think that's good?

I don't disagree that solar and wind are part time... but the economics have been steadily getting better. Coal, oil and nuclear work without subsidies? Really?! Why does nuclear therefore require billions in US Government guarantees for every single new plant we want to produce? Why do traditional energy companies require special tax breaks?

What about the investment that's going to be needed to increase the use of fossil fuels? We'll need to fix the grid, the supply lines, etc. We'll need to hope fakking doesn't frak the ground water- maybe it's safe- the jury is still out.

So, here's the thing. Renewables... we're talking about growing to maybe 20% of our supply. It could go a lot higher, but that's the shorter-term goal. Why are you wasting everyone's time saying what a waste it is instead of focusing on the real issue- getting us energy independent and quickly as possible?

Yes, we've discussed this before and I remain unimpressed with your fear of renewable energy.

Set aside the fact that you seem so focused on one small part of the solution, we've also discussed how nuclear and fossil fuels have their own costs and problems that you gloss over- waste disposal, not-in-my-backyard, massive upfront investments. There are no free lunches and there are no simple answers, which is why all-of-the-above is the fastest, most reasonable response.

Another reason- if we never invest in renewables, we will never be able to reap the rewards. There are a huge list of technologies that wouldn't have made your "acceptable list" that have spawned entire industries and reshaped the world. How many generations of computers, for instance, did we go through before they "made sense?" China ALREADY spends more than the U.S. on renewable energy with a much smaller economy. They know where the future lies.

Natural gas, nuclear and intelligent development of the vasr resources in this country would make us energy indeopendent and would provide clean air. i don't think anyone would consider this a "small part of the solution"

In regards to waste disposal; we currently have large amounts of waste created by defense, medical uses and by nuclear power plants. These are not being addressed. They were before president Obama stopped development of the Yucca Mountain Repositoory that would have provided safe waste storage for 10,000 years. We are now stuck with hundreds of individual sites in heavily populated areas in far less secure conditions. You also ignore the fact that waste from nuclear power plants can be recycled.

You are trying to make an arguement that we should spend trillions on technology that cannot work in the hopes that someday it might work. That is an indefensible arguement. "how many generations of computers did we go through before they made sense?" Zero, each generation worked and performed a function. As technology improved and they were massed produced because they worked so well many more were built at far lower cost. Wind and solar have each been around for over 100 years. They have never been useful in producing energy for general use and have never anfd as far as anyone can see will never be able to clean the air by any measurable amount and they cannot save any oil.

The choice is clear. Technology that is available and affordable that can provide for our needs and clean the air or live with huge energy costs and polluted air pouring trillions into old-failed technology that has never worked, does not work and has no indication it can ever work. Your idea of the future is a bleak one. I envision one were we have ample, clean and affordable energy. Your "vision" is one of futile attempts at trying to keep buggy whip factories going.

The Imported Oil and Gas Industry has gotten TAX CREDITS of all kinds for many years , why not extend the same Tax Credits to Solar, Wind , Wave , Bio-fuels , fuel-cells and Geothermal Energy ?

Fossil fuels supply 98% of our energy and recieve less tax credits than "reneewables" that supply less than 2%, do not clean the air, are five times more costly, are supported by mandates to purchase, and cannot clean the air and do not save one drop of oil,

The fossil fuel industry returns far more in ryalties that are paid in any tax credits to support new refineries and other projects. They pay trillions in taxes instead of costing trillions in grants, tax credits, and forced building of connecting power lines and forced purchase of hugely expensive power at far above market value.

We spend 380 billion dollars a year in Imported oil and gas, and some of the money goes to al-Qaeda through very wealthy extreme sunni-wahabi investors in Saudi Arabia , as we have learn in the USA Media and due to WikiLeaks , is that smart ?

Many Hedge-Funds and Private Equity Partnerships, the bankers to the Oil-Gas producers, went on a cheap-drug induced-nightmare-trip and wasted trillions of dollars in Credit -Default -Swaps , M-B-S , shorts and insurances,etc., as well as huge salaries and stock options for their executives and partners that later forced the USA Taxpayers to bail them all out , is that smart?

...and we have more energy than any other country on earth;

25% of known coal

2 trillion barresl of shale oil

Trillions and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas enough to supply inexpensive and clean power for every car and truck in the country.

Unknown reserves in the 85% of the land owned by the federal government, offshore on the west coast, eastern gulf coast, the Alaskan offshore and the entire Atlantic coast.

Yet we import 75% of our energy and have an up to $700 billion oil trade deficit.